Bill C-6: Senate stage

[CanadianC]

The amendment that Sen. Frum is proposing might be only an intent-to-reside amendments. This is just a guess as she was insisting on this in the committee meeting:

"Senator Frum: Ms. Taub, as you know, one of the provisions in Bill C-6 is to remove the intent-to-reside provision that the prior government put in place with Bill C-24. We heard that that provision is symbolic in nature because it is unenforceable to follow up on an intent-to-reside. So is it meaningful whether this provision exists?"

 

[Inlandoct2014]

REMINDER:

Follow-up of the Bill C-6: http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Mode=1&billId=8117654&Language=E
Watch the Senate sittings: http://senparlvu.parl.gc.ca/XRender/
Senate of Canada Order of the day: https://sencanada.ca/en/in-the-chamber/order-papers-notice-papers
Senate of Canada calendar: https://sencanada.ca/en/annual-calendars/

Senate of Canada's twitter: https://twitter.com/SenateCA/
Twitter du Sénat du Canada: https://twitter.com/SenatCA/

Other Twitter accounts:
Liberal Senator Mobina Jaffer: @SenJaffer https://twitter.com/senjaffer/with_replies
Non-affiliated Senator Ratna Omidvar: @ratnaomi https://twitter.com/ratnaomi/with_replies

List of Senators:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_Senators_of_Canada
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_Senators_of_Canada

As you can see here: http://senparlvu.parl.gc.ca/XRender/ : 2PM session today

Awesome, +1

 

[vasyok]

Just to make your clear, it does ask whether you have applied or not. "Have you previously applied to enter or remain in Canada?" ref. Application for a Study Permit Made Outside of Canada [IMM 1294] form BACKGROUND INFORMATION #2 (c)

How is this question relevant to PR application (previous/future) or dual intent? It asks you about whether you applied for any visa to Canada in the past (and if you look around that question, that whole section is there to help the VO assess the risk of applicant overstaying in the country)

 

[screech339]

Yes, you are completely right. The officer must be convinced that the applicant will not overstay. It has nothing to do with applicant's right to legally live in Canada. In many cases, one can even adjust his/her status while being in Canada. Unrelated example, many spouses of Canadians come to the country on visitor visa and and stay in country while the the sponsorship process is in progress. Yet to get such a visitor visa, the VO must have been convinced that a spouse in question will not overstay in Canada.

Yes. One can legally live in Canada "TEMPORARILY" or "PERMANENTLY". That is why work, visitor and study visa are form of TEMPORARY Resident Visas.

And you wondered why spouses of PR or Canadians have a difficult time getting a TRV to come to Canada. VO officers expect them to leave Canada at end of visa. If they suspects they will likely overstay their visa (in other words, NOT LEAVE CANADA), the visa will be denied.

 

[burnin]

Another thing that could be related to the amendment is this:

Senator Frum: This observation follows up on a suggestion that was made by one of our witnesses to implement smart permanent resident cards, the idea being that when somebody applies for citizenship they have to prove how much time they've spent in the country. In order for them to do that, they have to keep receipts and evidence of all the travel they've made in and out of the country.

We also heard from Ms. Hubers yesterday, I believe, that the greatest number of fraud cases in revocation cases has to do with fraud committed around false declarations about time spent in the country. I think that's what she said about this coming and going.

As per the testimony of Julie Taub, one of our witnesses, it seems strange that in this era of modern technology we don't have a simpler system for permanent residents to keep track of their entry and exit in and out of the country, much like we do when we enter the building here. We have our cards that let us in and out and record our comings and goings.

This observation has strong language. It suggests that the government be asked to implement a smart card residency program. If the committee felt that language was too instructive I would be okay with amending the final paragraph to say, "The committee urges the government to review or consider a smart card residency program.''

That quote was from committee stage

 

[davidken1]

Hey Screech339, your argument is blindly stated. Dual intent is valid and I can say 75% of students and temporary workers in Canada have dual intent during their application. Your argument is crude and doesn't stand!

Have any applicant ever tell the VO officer that he/she intends to stay to qualify for PR and citizenship in their study visa application? If yes, and still gotten study visa, then my argument is moot.

If no applicant wouldnt dare state this intention in their study visa application, then my argument stands.

 

[Whocares]

@Whocares, your name says it all. It's amazing how selfish some people can be. You reached the conclusion that international students are not in Canada to be Canadians but only to get their degrees.. do you think in the same manner that PRs should be prevented from pursuing education because they're here to be Canadians and not on study permits?
Students are more likely to experience the Canadian culture and society than someone who comes as a PR and immediately joins the workforce. People on work permits are are at least giving to society as much as those on PRs since PRs can be unemployed, but most on work permits cannot.
And then you can justify those students waiting for 5-6 years before getting their PR and then getting no credit for pre-PR. wow!

I am not selfish at all. Someone said that he does not care about 3/5 and only cares bout pre pr and he found 3/5 would make no diff. I wish we all be Canadians. But what you are saying is wrong. Once you are Canadian, of course you can study or even take 3 degrees because we did not sign for not studying when we be Canadians. Students have signed when they got the visa that they are in Canada to study and should return back home.

 

[vasyok]

Yes. One can legally live in Canada "TEMPORARILY" or "PERMANENTLY". That is why work, visitor and study visa are form of TEMPORARY Resident Visas.

Our debate started with you saying that student/workers have to promise not to immigrate to Canada or that they lied during the application if their intention was to immigrate; and now we are discussing what student/work visas are for

I'm not arguing with you that students/workers are "temporarily" in Canada; and "temporary visitor" means that the person must not overstay the validity of the visa and leave the country once it's expired, in other words, he has no legal right to stay in Canada indefinitely. But it has nothing to do with them having dual intent before/during/after the visa was granted.

 

[Redfield]

Many provinces including Quebec have specific programs to keep their temporary students, if you got a univeristy degree in Quebec and speak french then they'll automatically give their selection certificate and apply for PR. So maybe enough with the alternative facts, when you land for the first time as a temporary student they give you documentation about how you can become PR after graduating, I think this speaks for itself. The fact that you consider that pre-pr credit should be voided when it's an actual campaign promise that aims at helping those who got hit the worst by C-24 but whine because you gotta do 4 years instead of 3 and manage to spit on people who already did 8 in the process shows just how self centered you are.

 

[monalisa]

I am not selfish at all. Someone said that he does not care about 3/5 and only cares bout pre pr and he found 3/5 would make no diff. I wish we all be Canadians. But what you are saying is wrong. Once you are Canadian, of course you can study or even take 3 degrees because we did not sign for not studying when we be Canadians. Students have signed when they got the visa that they are in Canada to study and should return back home.

Students have signed when they got the visa that they are in Canada to study and should return back home
immigrants signed intention to stay in canada
;D

Anyways we cant change the facts, we have to obey government laws and rules 8)

 

[monalisa]

Many provinces including Quebec have specific programs to keep their temporary students, if you got a univeristy degree in Quebec and speak french then they'll automatically give their selection certificate and apply for PR. So maybe enough with the alternative facts, when you land for the first time as a temporary student they give you documentation about how you can become PR after graduating, I think this speaks for itself. The fact that you consider that pre-pr credit should be voided when it's an actual campaign promise that aims at helping those who got hit the worst by C-24 but whine because you gotta do 4 years instead of 3 and manage to spit on people who already did 8 in the process shows just how self centered you are.

For Quebec isnt correct as you mentioned,
They should apply for CSQ , but they have priority. NOT AUTOMATICALLY ;D

Guys maybe her amendment will not pass, stop stressing yourself ;D

 

[screech339]

Hey Screech339, your argument is blindly stated. Dual intent is valid and I can say 75% of students and temporary workers in Canada have dual intent during their application. Your argument is crude and doesn't stand!

While my point stands, unless you have proof that applicants actually stated their intentions of staying in Canada for PR / Citizenship in their study, visitor, work visa applications and actually gotten their visas, my point stands. Omission of intention to stay as PR/citizenship in any visa applications is still "lying by omission".

 

[Joshua1]

Have any applicant ever tell the VO officer that he/she intends to stay to qualify for PR and citizenship in their study visa application? If yes, and still gotten study visa, then my argument is moot.

If no applicant wouldnt dare state this intention in their study visa application, then my argument stands.

You are trolling. Dual intent is implicit in every study an temporary work permit, once you land in Canada. The whole immigration system is based on attracting the "best" professionals and students to come to Canada and stay. In fact, especially in Quebec, Immigration authorities visit the universities and beg people to apply for PR. Students and temporary workers are already integrated and paying taxes, so it's only natural to count pre PR days.

 

[Redfield]

For Quebec isnt correct as you mentioned,
They should apply for CSQ , but they have priority. NOT AUTOMATICALLY ;D

Guys maybe her amendment will not pass, stop stressing yourself ;D

Yes it's automatic granted if you apply for it of cours, it's not a matter of priority, you just have to satify to the criterias and ask for the CSQ, you receive it whitin 20 days usually. And there are two programs one for temporary students and the other one for temporary worker

 

[screech339]

You are trolling. Dual intent is implicit in every study an temporary work permit, once you land in Canada. The whole immigration system is based on attracting the "best" professionals and students to come to Canada and stay. In fact, especially in Quebec, Immigration authorities visit the universities and beg people to apply for PR. Students and temporary workers are already integrated and paying taxes, so it's only natural to count pre PR days.

But not "visitors"? Their status is no different from temporary workers / students.

So by your logic, only those who paid taxes are entitled to citizenship. I don't see anywhere in the citizenship laws that paying taxes is a requirement for citizenship. Your sense of entitlement is showing.